invading tribe in a country covered by forests, and from the savage character of the aborigines, as well as (2) from the lengthened period during which the hymns continued to be composed,-how the same appellations and epithets might come to be applied to different classes of beings, human, ethereal, and demoniacal, indiscriminately. In Section iii. (pp. 397-405) I quote the well-known passage from Manu's Institutes, which adverts to the superior sanctity of the country on the banks of the Sarasvati (which is in consequence presumed to have been for some time the seat of the most distinguished Indian sages, and the locality where the Hindu institutions were chiefly developed), and defines the limits of the several provinces of Brahmanical India, as then recognized. I next adduce a highly interesting legend from the Satapatha-brahmana, which narrates how the sacred fire (typifying, of course, the sacrificial rites of the Brahmans) travelled from the neighbourhood of the Sarasvati eastward, across the river Sadānīrā into Videha, or north-Behar. Section iv. (pp. 405-421) presents a selection of passages from the great epic poem, the Rāmāyaṇa, descriptive of the Rakshasas or gigantic demons by whom the Brahman settlers in southern India were oppressed and their rites obstructed, and whose monarch Ravana was vanquished and slain by the Indian hero Rāma, with the aid of an army of monkeys. In these poetic and hyperbolical descriptions, it is supposed (by some that) we can dis cern the indistinct outlines of a great movement of the Aryas from the Doab southward across the Vindhya

range, and their conflicts with the aboriginal tribes of the Dekhan, the enemies of the Brahmans and their institutions. The epithets applied to the Rakshasas in the Rāmāyaṇa correspond in many respects, it is observed, with those employed in the Rigveda to characterize the Dasyus, Rakshasas, and Yatudhānas. Section v. (pp. 422-423) contains some Hindu traditions regarding the tribes in the south of the peninsula, which, however, are not considered to throw any light on their real origin. Section vi. (pp. 423-438) supplies a variety of details, derived from Mr. A. D. Campbell's Telugu Grammar (including the important note by Mr. F. W. Ellis), and Dr. Caldwell's Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian languages, by which it is clearly shown that the Tamil, Telugu, Malayalim, and Canarese tongues (which are spoken by thirty-one millions of people), though, at different periods since the occupation of southern India by the Brahmans, they have received a large infusion of Sanskrit words, are, nevertheless, originally and fundamentally quite distinct from, and independent of, that language, and that Tamil composition in particular is regarded by the native authors as pure and classical in proportion to its freedom from Sanskrit words. In the viith, and concluding Section (pp. 438-444), the results of the preceding sections are summed up. From the fact (established both by philological considerations, and by the testimony of the south-Indian grammarians) that the Dravidian languages are essentially distinct from Sanskrit, it is argued that the people by whom the former class of languages were

spoken originally (i.c. before the Brahmanical invasion of the Dekhan) must have belonged to a race which had no affinity to the Sanskrit-speaking Aryas; and could not, therefore, as Manu asserts, have been degraded Kshatriyas. I then endeavour to show how the results obtained in this Chapter, viz., (1) that the Aryas, when living in the Panjab, came into conflict with an alien race called Dasyus; (2) that the Aryas can be shown from their own books to have at first occupied only the north-west of India and then to have advanced gradually to the east and south, and last of all to have crossed the Vindhya range into the Dekhan; and (3) that the original languages of the south of the peninsula are distinct from Sanskrit,-how, I say, these results harmonize with, or corroborate, the theory that the Hindus, or Indo-Arians, are not autochthonous, but immigrated into Hindustan from the north-west.9

10

The Appendix (pp. 445-488), and the "Additions and Corrections" contain some further illustrations of the subjects discussed in the body of the work, and in a few cases supply some modifications of the text which closer research has rendered necessary.

In the notes towards the close of the Volume, and in the Appendices, the Sanskrit passages have been printed in the Italic character." The system I have followed is nearly that of Sir W. Jones. The distinctions between some similar letters have not always been very

* [See note 3, p. ix.]

10 [Portions of the Appendix and additions have now been incorporated in the earlier part of the volume.]

11 [In the first edition the Sanskrit was printed in the Nāgari character throughout the greater part of the volume.]

carefully indicated; but the Sanskrit scholar will have no difficulty in determining the words which are intended.

Nearly all the Sanskrit texts in this Volume have been taken from printed editions. The quotations from those parts of the Rigveda which have not yet appeared in Professor Müller's edition, have been copied from the MS. copy in my possession, alluded to in the Preface to the First Volume. The quotations from Durgacharya, in pp. 166 f. and 173, have been derived from a MS. belonging to the East India House. That in p. 204 was, I believe, extracted from a MS. in the Library of the Asiatic Society in Calcutta. The two passages from Bhaskara Acharya, pp. 161 and 178, were obtained from Pandit Bapu Deva of the Benares College.

I owe it to the kindness of Professor Goldstücker that I am able to adduce the extracts from the Nyāya mālā vistara, in pp. 53 and 179.

The work of M. Vivien de Saint-Martin, entitled: "Etude sur la Géographie et les Populations Primitives du Nordouest de l'Inde d'après les Hymnes Védiques" (which discusses many of the subjects handled in the present volume), has only now come into my hands, as the last sheet, containing part of the Appendix and the "Additions and Corrections," is passing through the press.

The results at which this author has arrived in his valuable and ingenious dissertation, in regard to the origin of the Aryas, their immigration into India, and the direction of their movements within that country,

correspond precisely with those which I myself had reached. His views on some points of detail on which I had adopted a different opinion, tell even more strongly than my own in favour of the general conclusions in which we both coincide.12

12 I allude to his conclusion that the Sarayu referred to in the Veda was a river in the Panjab (in support of which he refers to Burnouf's Bhag. Pur. folio ed. p. ii. 455); and that the country of the Kikaṭas must, most probably, have been in Kos'ala or Audh, and not in Magadha, or South Behar.

I am happy to learn from M. de Saint-Martin's work that he intends to prosecute further his researches into the ethnography of India

[EDINBURGH, 1860.]